There’s a lingering – but easy to answer – question about whether it’s legal to put a conventional, ordinary-sized ‘Recall Walker’ sign on your private lawn.
Yes, it is. It’s a free speech right that cannot be abridged by state or local election ordinances limiting the mere display on private property of conventional political signs. See, Fiedorowicz v. City of Pewaukee. (The size and format of signs can be regulated in limited ways, but their mere display is protected.)
Over at the Fox Point Patch, there’s a post entitled, With No Recall Effort Under Way, Are Walker Recall Signs Legal?
In the post, it’s clear that some officials are unclear about American law, and seem to think that a Wisconsin election statute (when election signs can be displayed) or local ordinance can trump federal and Wisconsin constitutional speech rights. They can’t.
Even a village attorney seems unable to speak sensibly on this issue. The post notes that “Christopher Jaekels, who serves as village attorney for Whitefish Bay and Bayside, said he just informed both villages about a week ago not to enforce the state statute because of different court rulings, including the 2004 court case out of Pewaukee [i.e., Fiedorowicz].”
That’s sound advice. But then Attorney Jaekels is cited supporting police conversations with residents about ordinary signs on private property:
Meanwhile, Whitefish Bay police say they will remove political signs if they are in a public area like a park and will go talk to residents about political signs in private property if a complaint is filed.
Jaekels said he believes Whitefish Bay police are on the right track. While they don’t absolutely enforce the removal of signs on private property, he said it’s about being courteous to your neighbor, because no one wants to stare at a political sign year round.
Did Attorney Jaekels say that? That police should talk to residents about removing lawful political signs on private property, if a complaint is filed?
Municipal law is hard, mostly because when the client is the municipality, local politicians will really want to hear what they want to hear. Pandering to appease a client that dislikes political criticism is an easy, but later often troublesome, course.
Jaekels has been around a while, but this is foolish advice. It doesn’t matter whether some people ‘don’t want to see a sign year round.’ (It probably seems cunning in a certain way: maybe no one will complain, if they do nothing will come of it, or if something comes of it one can blame a court for siding with dissenters, malcontents, etc.)
The communities he counsels risk litigation when police or other officials ‘talk’ to residents about removing ordinary political signs (Recall Walker, Impeach Obama, Vote Nader, whatever) on their lawns.
That’s a risky proposition: after all, it’s how the City of Pewaukee found itself on the caption of an expensive, federal lawsuit.